I was just wondering why there wasn't some sort of reaction piece, or at least a 150 word open thread like:
"This is a reaction thread for discussion of the Paterno et. al. vs. the NCAA report 'WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU! WE ARE PSU!"
I got home from an 18+ hour shift at the hospital hoping to see a quick reaction and community discussion from BSD members about the Costas deal since I didn't have an opportunity to watch it. Instead, the last posted article was at 11:31 AM in one of those relatively dumb SB Nation story stream things that I think everyone hates but is afraid to say anything about. Not to mention there were several comments within the previously posted stories questioning why there wasn't a reaction thread.
I don't consider myself a "Joe Paterno apologist" or a "JoeBot" or whatever demeaning assholish name journalists want to give people who have found a way to not make issues mutually exclusive, but I feel like the issue of several key figures in the Penn State community opening up a lawsuit against the NCAA is kind of a big deal no matter what "side" you identify with.
I'd like to follow this criticism with a caveat that there may be a great reason for the lack of the above-mentioned suggestion of which I am not aware. Maybe there's an article to come, or one being posted while I write this fanpost, or maybe none of the staff were available tonight. But it does seem like this topic is often deliberately avoided in many main page articles.
Quick intermission in honor of the recently released Season 4 of a truly great comedy tv series:
Finally, while I have my forum and while I am holding the talking rock, there was a post 19 days ago receiving 37 recs (which is truely unheard of nowadays) and actually appeared on the historical, and very missed, "Recommended FanPosts" tab (which is a hint btw to lower the limit for the "recommended fanposts" tab).
The post's topic was one that has been extensively covered in the comments of many articles about a semantics debate for which there appears to be 3 parties:
1. People who care because they don't like the word
2. People who don't care at all either way
3. People who say they don't care but then incessantly hate on AND continue to use the word in the face of people who do seem to care
While I would personally identify somewhere between 1 and 2, since I have refrained from commenting on the debate until now, I have to admit, it kinda bugs me (pun intended), so I guess I'm leaning towards #1. Personally, it started for me when the group in charge of the BBall student section named us the "Nittwits" which, quite frankly, not only sounds dumb, but in fact implies that we are dumb. If you read through that particular thread, you'll find that many of the comments supporting the underlying premise of the well-written satirical essay (written by a gentleman and a scholar of our BSD community) were very well received by the community.
Now in my eyes there's two ways of being annoying. There's being funny annoying like these guys:
and then there's being trolling and incessantly annoying, like a contributor to this site who insists on naming his column after a poorly constructed metaphor for picking bugs out of hair, despite a multi-rec masterpiece displaying his readership's apparent animosity towards this nickname.
For those who still don't know at this point, I'm talking about the word "Nits." I google imaged the word looking for pics of Penn State fans, or maybe of Penn State Nittany lions and got this:
You may find that there's absolutely nothing that references Penn State in this image. You may also find that there is nothing necessarily strong about using an argument like "I googled nits and nothing Penn State came up!" But in this case I think it's valid.
Maybe I'm way off base on all of these constructive criticisms, in which case I'll hear about it in the comments, but I felt like it was necessary to voice my opinion, especially after my post-call fatigue destroyed my inhibition.
I was taught that you should never end on a bad note so three miscellaneous things to wrap it up.
1. Emmert is a jerk that should be punched in the nose (multiple times)
3. Regardless of our arguments, petty or grandiose, we are and always will be Penn State, and that means we're all on the same team. We have top notch academics first, and oh yea... we play some tough, hard-nosed football.